ArticlePloS one2025
Forward-backward translation, content validity, face validity, construct validity, criterion validity, test-retest reliability, and internal consistency of a questionnaire on patient acceptance of orthodontic retainer.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07659041 (Effectiveness, Patient Acceptance, and Cost Estimation of 3D-printed Retainer Compared to Hawley Retainer in Expansion Case), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Effectiveness, Patient Acceptance, and Cost Estimation of 3D-printed Retainer Compared to Hawley Retainer in Expansion Case: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A novel NFR-based conceptual quality framework for modern API industry.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Translation, Validation and Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale Version 3.0 (POSAS 3.0) Into Malay Language for Injury-Related Scar.International wound journal · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- [Preliminary development and evaluation of a scale to assess caregivers' responsive feeding behaviors for children aged 0-24 months].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2025Article
- Psychometric Properties of the Adjustment to Aging Scale (Atas) in Iranian Older Adults.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Midwives' willingness to provide home-based maternity and child health care, along with the associated factors and barriers, in Gondar, Ethiopia.Frontiers in global women's health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to assess the validity and reliability of a questionnaire on patient acceptance of orthodontic retainers. The original questionnaire was forward- and backward-translated, followed by four validity tests (content validity, face validity, construct validity, criterion validity) and two reliability tests (test-retest reliability, internal consistency). Content validity was assessed by nine orthodontists who appraised the questionnaire's representativeness, relevance, clarity, and necessity. Face validity was established through semi-structured in-depth interviews with 35 English-literate participants currently wearing orthodontic retainers. Construct validity was established through Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). For criterion validity, 107 participants concurrently answered the questionnaire and the Retainer-modified Malaysian Oral Health Impact Profile questionnaire. Test-retest reliability was verified by 34 subjects who responded to the questionnaire again after a two-week interval. Six revised items passed the threshold value of 0.78 for Item-Content Validity Index and Content Validity Ratio and were revised based on findings from the face validity test. Principal Component Analysis of EFA extracted information on only one component, and all items were positively correlated with the component matrix. Spearman's rho value (rs = 0.490 and rs = 0.416) indicated a moderate correlation between the two questionnaires for criterion validity. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient ranged from 0.687 to 0.913, indicating moderate to excellent test-retest reliability. Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.687 to 0.913 indicating that none of the questionnaire items showed unacceptable or poor internal consistency. The questionnaire on patient acceptance of orthodontic retainers has been validated and can be used in both clinical and research settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.